🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <CGwMMB.D6F@dvorak.amd.com>, aad@dvorak.amd.com (Anthony A. Datri) writes:
|>Xref: dxcern comp.infosystems.www:3501 comp.windows.x:69729 comp.windows.x.i386unix:5385 comp.windows.x.motif:21250 gnu.misc.discuss:12425 comp.os.linux.development:3024 comp.sources.d:8570

|>>I would guess none whatsoever. Mosaic *is* a Motif interface to libwww. If
|>>you want to have another interface then you would throw out virtually all of
|>>Mosaic.
|>
|>Huh?  How can Mosaic's functionality *possibly* depend on pseudo-3D art-deco
|>borders around everything?

Because it uses the common library of World Wide Web code. This contains
routines that resolve anchors, access servers, parse SGML etc. If anyone
wants a TCL W3 client then they are quite welcome to the code. CERN made it
publicaly avaliable (not sure about the exact restrictions, but certainly
they are GNU-ish).

If TCL is as easy to use as is claimed a rough and ready type browser but
with full functionality should take no more than a week, But it will take
you at least a year to transform a hack into a comercial quality system.
Here is a start:

<http://info.cern.ch/hypertext/WWW/Library/Status.html>

So TCL people quit bitching and start coding! If you had spent half as much
time coding as bitching you might be finished by now.



I can understand the people who don't want to pay for software. But I don't
see why they should force the rest of us to follow them. The Xmosaic people
have produced a good product that they make avaliable without charge. It
requires the purchase of two things to run it, a computer and Motif. Should
NCSA only write code that runs on free computers?

--
Phillip M. Hallam-Baker

Not Speaking for anyone else.